Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

The Most One-sided Battle in History

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 6>
Author
Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain

Suspended

Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1296
  Quote Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: The Most One-sided Battle in History
    Posted: 02-Sep-2005 at 21:23
Hydaspes as an exception, all of Alexander the Great's battles were pretty much massacres.
Back to Top
Tobodai View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4310
  Quote Tobodai Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Sep-2005 at 22:50
Im totally suprised no one has mentioned the most obvious battle for one sided casualties: Manila bay in 1898.  I dont know Spanish casualties though they were at least in the hundreds and perhaps thousands, American casualties was one fat guy who died of heat exhaustion.
"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
Back to Top
Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain

Suspended

Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1296
  Quote Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Sep-2005 at 22:56
Originally posted by Tobodai

Im totally suprised no one has mentioned the most obvious battle for one sided casualties: Manila bay in 1898.  I dont know Spanish casualties though they were at least in the hundreds and perhaps thousands, American casualties was one fat guy who died of heat exhaustion.

Sir, you have kicked me in the groin.

The Battle of Kiev had 100,000 German KIA & WIA, compared to 300,000 Russian KIA & WIA, as well as 665,000 POWs.


Back to Top
Tobodai View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4310
  Quote Tobodai Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Sep-2005 at 23:45
I have?
"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
Back to Top
Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain

Suspended

Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1296
  Quote Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Sep-2005 at 20:42
Yes. You have presented a fact about my country's history, when I, a person of the Philippines should have been the one to do it.

Sir, you have besmirched my honor. Prepare you defenses, I shall come for you soon...

Back on topic, though it is much smaller in scale, the 'Battle' of Wounded Knee was pretty one sided.


Back to Top
azimuth View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
SlaYer'S SlaYer

Joined: 12-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2979
  Quote azimuth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Sep-2005 at 21:47

 

i would say Battle of Karbala

30 000 against 72

all 72 were killed among them the Grandson of the Prophet Mohammed pbuh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Karbala

 

 

Back to Top
ill_teknique View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 28-Jun-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 636
  Quote ill_teknique Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Sep-2005 at 22:04
Originally posted by Ahmed The Fighter

Battle of Yarmuk when 20,000 arab soldiers inflicted heavy losses on Byzantine army of 40,000 men near Yarmuk river.


khaleed al waleed defeating the persians outnumbered like 5 or 6 to 1
Back to Top
Emperor Barbarossa View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 15-Jul-2005
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
  Quote Emperor Barbarossa Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Sep-2005 at 08:05
Battle of Watling Street is a pretty one sided battle. Britons had an estimated 300,000 while the Romans had only 15,000. Romans lose around a thousand while Britons lose 80,000.

Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
  Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Sep-2005 at 08:58

Combatantschemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" />>>

Modoc

United States

Commanders>>

Captain Jack
Shaknasty Jim
Scarfaced Charley

Lt. Col. Frank Wheaton
Maj. John Green
Capt. Reuben Bernard

Strength>>

53 warriors

400 soldiers

Casualties>>

0

37

Back to Top
Paul View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar
AE Immoderator

Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
  Quote Paul Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Sep-2005 at 13:00

Originally posted by Emperor Barbarossa

Battle of Watling Street is a pretty one sided battle. Britons had an estimated 300,000 while the Romans had only 15,000. Romans lose around a thousand while Britons lose 80,000.

The ancient British always amaze me, their capacity to field an army twice the size of the entire population of the area, women, children aged and infirmed included.

Light blue touch paper and stand well back

http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk

http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk
Back to Top
Constantine XI View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
  Quote Constantine XI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Sep-2005 at 21:23
Warsaw Uprising.
Back to Top
Lannes View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 439
  Quote Lannes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Sep-2005 at 22:25

The Battle of Amphipolis (422 BC) is worth mentioning.  600 Athenian casualties compared to Sparta's 7 or 8.

τρέφεται δέ, ὤ Σώκρατης, ψυχὴ τίνι;
Back to Top
Jalisco Lancer View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Mexico
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2112
  Quote Jalisco Lancer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Sep-2005 at 02:37


San Jacinto
Back to Top
Vamun Tianshu View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 15-Dec-2004
Location: Japan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 418
  Quote Vamun Tianshu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Sep-2005 at 03:34
San Jacinto indeed,Can't believe the Texans won...

In Honor
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Sep-2005 at 15:17

Isn't that what they call a massacre not a battle?

1637 Attack on the Pequot Fort

500 Indians + 100 English killed 600 - 800 Pequots

Back to Top
Emperor Barbarossa View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 15-Jul-2005
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
  Quote Emperor Barbarossa Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Sep-2005 at 18:27
San Jacinto was a massacre. The Texans surprised the Mexicans while they were napping so it is no suprise that they won the battle.

Back to Top
Decebal View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Digital Prometheus

Joined: 20-May-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1791
  Quote Decebal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Sep-2005 at 11:17

Cajamarca, 1532

Incas: 8000 vs Spanish 168

Inca casualties: 7000 vs Spanish casualties: 0

Let's see you beat that!

What is history but a fable agreed upon?
Napoleon Bonaparte

Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.- Mohandas Gandhi

Back to Top
Komnenos View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Administrator

Joined: 20-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4361
  Quote Komnenos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Sep-2005 at 13:58
Originally posted by Decebal

Cajamarca, 1532


Incas: 8000 vs Spanish 168


Inca casualties: 7000 vsSpanish casualties: 0


Let's see you beat that!



That's a pretty good batting average.
Beats Omdurman hands down.
[IMG]http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i137/komnenos/crosses1.jpg">
Back to Top
Decebal View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Digital Prometheus

Joined: 20-May-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1791
  Quote Decebal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Sep-2005 at 16:20
Now in all fairness, some historians have claimed that the casualty figures advanced by the Spanish in regards to Cajamarca have been exagerated. But the fact remains that the Spanish won a great victory against a much  larger Inca army without losing a man.
What is history but a fable agreed upon?
Napoleon Bonaparte

Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.- Mohandas Gandhi

Back to Top
Jalisco Lancer View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Mexico
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2112
  Quote Jalisco Lancer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Sep-2005 at 19:00
Originally posted by Emperor Barbarossa

San Jacinto was a massacre. The Texans surprised the Mexicans while
they were napping so it is no suprise that they won the battle.


Santa Anna's fault.
He did not order to post centinels.
some 700 mexican were killed in matters of minutes, while the texicans suffered only 2 cassualties
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 6>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.